Why now ? Why didn’t someone create this technology 20 years ago ?Closed ledgers. The app needs access to your accounts transactions history, and old financial platforms have not allowed their users to share their account history with apps. And the entire system is built around the incentive-design, and it won’t work if users can conceal transactions from the system. If you want to be part of the system, then you need to let the system read your transactions. Every transaction you receive and every transaction you send.

The open source revolution has created a new breed of financial protocols, that are open, and built by coders for coders. They are built to maximize possibility, and it'd make no sense not to expose an API through which users can share their transaction data directly from the ledger, untampered and untouched, as rendered by the peer-reviewed open-source software.

How is it coming of the ground? Why would anyone participate? Where isthe basic income coming from?

The system is based on the philosophy that there exists corporations that would choose to voluntarily give part of their profit back to the community. That some corporations would choose to do what they are currently forced to do through coercive taxation.

The corporations that then join the network will become really attractive to consumers, and might gradually outcompete other corporations, and as people get accustomed to dividend-privileges, it´s probably going to become the standard system and could replace coercive taxation almost entirely.

I call this basic framework RESILIENCE, and it could create a planetary-wide dividend network thats based on voluntary participation.

RESILIENCE also provides a framework for secondary applications, through which the users can choose to donate part of their dividends to different causes. The idea here is that if corporations find it in themselves to support their community, then perhaps the members of the community will find it in themselves to voluntarily support the less fortunate, or to support community services such as a minimum guaranteed income, schools, and healthcare. That´s where the money for Basicincome.co comes from, from individuals who choose to pay the kindness of the original corporation forward to secondary applications, like Basicincome.co. The RESILIENCE protocol provides a basic personalized safety net, and Basicincome.co adds an option for redistribution of wealth from those with high-yield safety nets.

RESILIENCE could be understood as a full-scale alternative to nation-state-based coercive taxation. And yes, it´s as simple as it sounds. Incentive-centered design and feed-back-loop thinking is key. The problem with humanity isn´t that we´ve lacked the will, rather that we´ve been unable to connect around our good intentions, limited by our systems. My idea is that this simple alternative system could unleash untapped potential, similar to how crowdfunding has connected people in ways that were unimaginable 10 years ago.

I understand the incentive-structure for RESILIENCE, but what incentive-design do the secondary applications use ?

I believe the threshold for an individual to donate part of their dividends is lower than for the original corporation, and these secondary applications might not need additional reward-systems. And it´s not like we´ll be flying blind, the internet has enabled networked join attention, and there´ll be all sorts of 'you donate I donate' effects, like with crowdfunding, mirror behaviour.

How did you come up with the idea?

I studied medical science in my early 20s, and reflected a lot on Robert Karasek's theories of occupational stress and employee control. I then drifted into basic income philosophy and began to write about my ideas of basic income and memetics, and how the ability to say no has a profound positive impact on overall quality of life.Then 2 years ago, I discovered Ripple, an open-source financial platform with an open API. That empowered me as a creative because I could build on their platform without having to go through a bunch of bureaucrats. So I began sketching out my concept of dividend pathways, and then added my incentive-layer idea. Then I put the whole thing on ice for a while after a break up, and returned to it in May 2014.

When did you first hear about basic income?In med school, about 5 years ago. As I came more and more in contact with the tense world of the adults there was nothing else to do but to research a better system. During my medical studies, I'd see patients all the time who were suffering from scarcity-related fight and flight symptoms. And I never understood why it had to be so.

What´s wrong with coercion ?

Serotonin. Look at other primates and how they react to being coerced. Our brains are hardwired for dominance hierarchies, attention-networks, and if someone coerces another into following their attention then that other being misses out on everything that´s beyond their rulers consciousness. There´s so much to explore, and the more space we allow each other, you know, there´s so much potential consciousness that could be released if you loosen the leash a bit.

My favourite metaphor is to look at our sister species, chimpanzees and bonobos. Chimpz are hierarchical and the alpha coerces those below to follow his attention and to conform to his world, while Bonobos are more peaceful.. Chimpanzees live in scarcity in terms of food and resources, while bonobos live in abundance so they have no need for scarcity-based Idea-hierarchies. We too live in abundance, but we haven´t shared our abundance so we´re still stuck with hierarchical memetic networks, tense shoulders. Look at generation Xs american culture in the 90s and 00s, they were ashamed of sex and nudity and everything that´s enjoyable, and they loved violence and everything that´s douchey. And sex is an escape from mediation, right, it´s a rabbit hole, it´s a more powerful pull than the pull of american generation Xs media-narrative, whilst violence is the opposite, it´s coercive and reinforces stress-memes in the amygdala. Serotonin. Pathways of imagination and attention and consciousness. Joint attention. Memes, belief, waking dreams.We actively metabolize belief - story, and whoever narrates your life becomes the architect of your consciousness. They choose what you experience. That´s where the idea of 'being controlled by the media' comes from, and Timothy Leary´s famous philosophy how 'whoever controls your attention controls your mind'. That´s why I don´t wish for anyone to be coerced into joint attention, I want us to dream, to follow our inner voice instead of coerced external mediation. To charm each other rather than coerce. What I refer to as sexual selection by mate choice at the level of Ideas. Subjectivity as a human right, the end of what Rick Falkvinge, founder of Swedish Pirate Party, calls 'Why Can´t Offline-Borns Tell Difference Between Voluntary And Forced Actions'.